do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-450/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 6 July 2022 — Caixabank, SA and Others v ADICAE and Others
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2022408EN.01003201.xml










24.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/32






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 6 July 2022 — Caixabank, SA and Others v ADICAE and Others
(Case C-450/22)
(2022/C 408/42)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Caixabank SA, Caixa Ontinyent SA, Banco Santander SA, successor to the rights and obligations of Banco Popular Español SA y Banco Pastor SA, Targobank, SA, Credifimo SAU, Caja Rural de Teruel SCC, Caja Rural de Navarra SCC, Cajasiete Caja Rural SCC, Liberbank SA, Banco Castilla La Mancha SA, Bankia SA, successor to the rights and obligations of Banco Mare Nostrum SA, Unicaja Banco, SA, Caja Rural de Asturias SA, Caja de Arquitectos SCC (Arquia Bank SA), Nueva Caja Rural de Aragón SC, Caja Rural de Granada SCC SA, Caja Rural del Sur SCC, Caja Rural de Jaén, Barcelona y Madrid SCC, Caja Rural de Albacete, Ciudad Real y Cuenca SCC (Globalcaja), Caja Laboral Popular SCC (Kutxa), Caja Rural Central SCC, Caja Rural de Extremadura SCC, Caja Rural de Zamora SCC, Banco Sabadell SA, Banca March SA, Ibercaja, Banca Pueyo SA

Respondents: ADICAE, M.A.G.G., M.R.E.M., A.B.C., Óptica Claravisión, S.L., A.T.M., F.A.C., A.P.O., P.S.C., J.V.M.B., legal successor of C.M.R.

Questions referred







1.


For the purposes of a review of transparency in the context of a collective action, is an abstract assessment of terms used by more than one hundred financial institutions in millions of banking contracts, without taking into account the level of pre-contractual information offered on the legal and financial burden of the term or the other circumstances occurring in each case at the time when the contract was concluded, covered by Article 4(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC, (1) where it refers to the circumstances attending the conclusion of the contract, and by Article 7(3) of that directive, where it refers to similar terms?










2.


Is the possibility of conducting an abstract review of transparency from the perspective of the average consumer, where a number of the contracts offered are aimed at different specific groups of consumers or where numerous financial institutions having, economically and geographically, very different business areas were using standard terms and conditions over a very long period of time during which public awareness of such terms was developing, compatible with Articles 4(2) and 7(3) of Directive 93/13/EEC?






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10659 – VITERRA / GAVILON AGRICULTURE INVESTMENT) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 260/05
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Italy, Spain, agricultural production, agricultural trade, agro-industry, cereals, economic concentration, leguminous vegetable, merger control, oleaginous plant, vegetable oil








C_2022260EN.01001001.xml










6.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/10






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10659 – VITERRA / GAVILON AGRICULTURE INVESTMENT)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 260/05)

1.   
On 28 June 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Viterra Limited (‘Viterra’, Netherlands),










—


Gavilon Agriculture Investment, Inc.’s grain and ingredients business (‘Gavilon’s grain and ingredients business’, USA).




Viterra will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Gavilon’s grain and ingredients business.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


Viterra is active in the origination, marketing, processing, refining, storage and handling of agricultural commodities globally including grains and pulses, oilseeds, oilseed meals, crude and refined oils and dried distillers’ grain. In particular, Viterra is active in the supply of corn and rye in Spain and wheat in Italy,










—


Gavilon’s grain and ingredients business is active in the origination, m storage, handling, logistics, marketing, and distribution of grains and ingredients, including grains and pulses, oilseeds, oilseed meals, crude and refined oils and dried distillers’ grain. In particular, Gavilon’s grain and ingredients business is active in the supply of corn and rye in Spain, as well as wheat in Italy.






3.   

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.



4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.10659 – VITERRA / GAVILON AGRICULTURE INVESTMENT
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 22964301
Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-631/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — MZ v Commission (Civil Service — Officials — Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation — Limitation of the choice of the second language in which the tests are to be carried out — Non-inclusion on the reserve list — Plea of illegality — Admissibility — Discrimination based on language — Special nature of the posts to be filled — Justification — Interests of the service — Proportionality)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), language skills, linguistic discrimination, professional qualifications, tax authorities








C_2022340EN.01003101.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/31






Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — MZ v Commission
(Case T-631/20) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation - Limitation of the choice of the second language in which the tests are to be carried out - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Plea of illegality - Admissibility - Discrimination based on language - Special nature of the posts to be filled - Justification - Interests of the service - Proportionality)
(2022/C 340/41)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: MZ (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Lilamand, D. Milanowska and A.-C. Simon, acting as Agents, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for competition EPSO/AD/363/18 decided, after review, not to place her name on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 7 in the field of taxation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for competition EPSO/AD/363/18 decided, after review, not to place the name of MZ on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 7 in the field of taxation;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 423, 7.12.2020.
Case T-129/21: Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — Colombani v EEAS (Civil Service — Officials — EEAS staff — Post of Head of the EU Delegation to Canada — Post of Director for Middle East and North Africa — Rejection of application)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Canada, European official, Middle East, North Africa, Union delegation, competition (EU), diplomatic profession, managing director








C_2022340EN.01003301.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/33






Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — Colombani v EEAS
(Case T-129/21) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - EEAS staff - Post of Head of the EU Delegation to Canada - Post of Director for Middle East and North Africa - Rejection of application)
(2022/C 340/44)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Jean-Marc Colombani (Auderghem, Belgium) (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and R. Spáč, acting as Agents, and by M. Troncoso Ferrer and F.-M. Hislaire, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of 17 April 2020 by which the European External Action Service (EEAS) rejected his application for the post of Director for Middle East and North Africa (vacancy notice 2020/48) and of the decision of 6 July 2020 by which EEAS rejected his application for the post of Head of the Delegation to Canada (vacancy notice 2020/134).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Jean-Marc Colombani to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1202 of 6 July 2022 approving amendments to the specification for a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication (‘Bouches-du-Rhône’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, designation of origin, labelling, product designation, red wine, rosé wine, white wine








L_2022186EN.01000801.xml










13.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 186/8








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1202
of 6 July 2022
         
approving amendments to the specification for a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication (‘Bouches-du-Rhône’ (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 99 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Commission has examined France’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Bouches-du-Rhône’, submitted pursuant to Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. These amendments include changing the name ‘Bouches-du-Rhône’ to ‘Pays des Bouches-du-Rhône’.












(2)


The Commission published the application for the approval of amendments to the specification in the Official Journal of the European Union, as required by Article 97(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 (2).












(3)


No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(4)


The amendments to the specification should therefore be approved in accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Bouches-du-Rhône’ (PGI) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 6 July 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(2)  
            OJ C 88, 24.2.2022, p. 70.
Case T-179/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission (Civil service — Open competition — Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) — Non-inclusion on the reserve list — Composition of the selection board — Stability — Manifest error of assessment — Liability)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EPSO, European official, competition (EU), indemnification, recruitment








C_2022340EN.01002902.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/29






Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission
(Case T-179/20) (1)

(Civil service - Open competition - Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Composition of the selection board - Stability - Manifest error of assessment - Liability)
(2022/C 340/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: JP (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Lilamand, D. Milanowska and A.-C. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 refused, after review, to include her name on the reserve list of successful candidates in that competition and, second, compensation for the damage which she claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JP to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Case T-278/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — Zhejiang Hangtong Machinery Manufacture and Ningbo Hi-Tech Zone Tongcheng Auto Parts v Commission (Dumping — Imports of steel road wheels originating in China — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitive collection of the provisional duty — Articles 17(4), 18 and 20 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 — Lack of cooperation — Insufficient information provided to the Commission)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, steel, vehicle parts








C_2022340EN.01003002.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/30






Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — Zhejiang Hangtong Machinery Manufacture and Ningbo Hi-Tech Zone Tongcheng Auto Parts v Commission
(Case T-278/20) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of steel road wheels originating in China - Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitive collection of the provisional duty - Articles 17(4), 18 and 20 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 - Lack of cooperation - Insufficient information provided to the Commission)
(2022/C 340/40)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Zhejiang Hangtong Machinery Manufacture Co. Ltd (Taizhou, China) and Ningbo Hi-Tech Zone Tongcheng Auto Parts Co. Ltd (Ningbo, China) (represented by: K. Adamantopoulos and P. Billiet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck and G. Luengo, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/353 of 3 March 2020 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of steel road wheels originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2020 L 65, p. 9).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Zhejiang Hangtong Machinery Manufacture Co. Ltd and Ningbo Hi-Tech Zone Tongcheng Auto Parts Co. Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 6.7.2020.
Case T-792/21: Order of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — ClientEarth v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Aarhus Convention — Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 — Impact assessment report and other documents relating to a legislative initiative in the environmental field — Implied refusal of access — Express decision adopted after the action was brought — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU environmental policy, EU initiative, access to EU information, corporate governance, environmental impact, environmental law, legislative initiative








C_2022340EN.01004202.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/42






Order of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — ClientEarth v Commission
(Case T-792/21) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Aarhus Convention - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Impact assessment report and other documents relating to a legislative initiative in the environmental field - Implied refusal of access - Express decision adopted after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 340/59)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ClientEarth AISBL (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: F. Logue, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the implied decision of the European Commission of 12 October 2021 rejecting the confirmatory application for access to several documents relating to the European Union’s legislative initiative regarding sustainable corporate governance.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Commission is to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 84, 21.2.2022.
Case T-419/22: Action brought on 6 July 2022 — MEDEX v EUIPO — Gerrit Cornelis Johan Stein (medex)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, confectionery product, cosmetic product, dietary product, food additive, hairdressing and beauty care, honey, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2022326EN.01002401.xml










29.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/24






Action brought on 6 July 2022 — MEDEX v EUIPO — Gerrit Cornelis Johan Stein (medex)
(Case T-419/22)
(2022/C 326/32)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: MEDEX, živilska industrija, d.o.o. (Ljubljana, Slovenia) (represented by: N. Čuden, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gerrit Cornelis Johan Stein (Elp, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark medex in colours maroon, yellow and white — European Union trade mark No 10 307 494

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 May 2022 in Case R 1361/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of the obligation to state reasons under Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 58, in particular Article 58(1)(a), and Article 58(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-408/21: Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — HB v Commission (Public service contracts — Provision of technical assistance services to the High Judicial Council and to the Ukrainian authorities — Irregularities in the contract award procedures — Recovery of sums wrongly paid — Enforceable decisions — Article 299 TFEU — Competence of the author of the act — Non-contractual liability of the Union)
Date: 2022-07-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Ukraine, award of contract, damages, debt, enforcement of ruling, interest, provision of services, public procurement, services contract, technical cooperation








C_2022340EN.01003801.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/38






Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — HB v Commission
(Case T-408/21) (1)

(Public service contracts - Provision of technical assistance services to the High Judicial Council and to the Ukrainian authorities - Irregularities in the contract award procedures - Recovery of sums wrongly paid - Enforceable decisions - Article 299 TFEU - Competence of the author of the act - Non-contractual liability of the Union)
(2022/C 340/52)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: HB (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Araujo Arce, J. Estrada de Solà and J. Baquero Cruz, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action, the applicant seeks, first, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the annulment of Commission Decision C(2021) 3339 final of 5 May 2021 relating to the recovery of a debt in the amount of EUR 4 241 507,00 payable by the applicant under the contract with reference TACIS/2006/101-510, and of Commission Decision C(2021) 3340 final of 5 May 2021 relating to the recovery of a debt in the amount of EUR 1 197 055,86 payable by the applicant under the contract with reference CARDS/2008/166-429; and, secondly, on the basis of Article 268 TFEU, the reimbursement of any amounts recovered by the European Commission on the basis of those decisions, together with late-payment interest at the rate applied by the European Central Bank (ECB) plus seven points, and the payment of symbolic damages of EUR 1, subject to increase, for the non-material damage which she claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2021) 3339 final of 5 May 2021 relating to the recovery of a debt of EUR 4 241 507 payable by HB and Commission Decision C(2021) 3340 final of 5 May 2021 relating to the recovery of a debt of EUR 1 197 055,86 payable by HB;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders HB and the European Commission each to bear their own costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 338, 23.8.2021.